34 South Main St., Attleboro, MA - (508) 222-7000
News
Legislators: Voter anger may lead to end of income tax
Top Headlines The legislators said they think the move is too drastic and would cripple state services, but believe voters are looking for a way to lower their costs and lash out at government. "I think people are frustrated and are looking at a way of expressing it," said state Rep. John Lepper, R-Attleboro. State Rep. Betty Poirier, R-North Attleboro, agreed. "There is a great deal of frustration out there regarding the cost of everything going up," she said. "I have constituents who say they cannot afford the gas to get to work. I would not be surprised if it passed." A group calling itself Committee for Smaller Government is sponsoring the move and has collected enough signatures to get it on the November ballot. If passed, it would end the state income tax, which accounts for $11 billion, or almost 40 percent of state revenue. "We want to save the people and the businesses of Massachusetts from economic ruin caused by high taxes and big government," said Carla Howell, leader of the group. "We want low taxes to attract business, jobs and talent into the state, rather than allowing high taxes to drive them out of state. We want taxpayers to get back an average or $3,600 every year to save, spend, or give away as they see fit," she said. "With more tax dollars back in the hands of the workers who earned it, people in need will have a real chance to better their lives through private charity that is effective, dignified and humane." A number of groups and individuals have lined up against the measure, including social services advocates, legislative leaders and the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. Even lawmakers who traditionally advocate for lower taxes, such as Lepper, say they oppose the measure as too extreme. Lepper said service for the disabled would "disappear" and other services would be greatly scaled back. Poirier said cities and towns are hurting now with tight budgets, but the current situation is nothing compared to what would happen if the income tax was eliminated. "Can you image a 40 percent cut?" Poirier said. "I advocate for judicious cuts, but not with reckless abandon." Howell said she wants state government to cut the entire 40 percent if the measure passes, and not replace the income tax with increases in other taxes. "Politicians like to threaten to cut services people care most about so they can distract attention away from the pork, waste and sweetheart deals that they dish out to their special interest friends. But ending the income tax will force the legislature to cut the waste, which is why they oppose it so fiercely," she said. Rep. Richard Ross, R-Wrentham, said the cuts advocated by Howell would be "disastrous." He said he would favor reasonable cuts in waste and taxes. Both Ross and Poirier said voter anger might not be as great if the state kept its promise from years ago and lowered the income tax rate to 5 percent. It is now 5.3 percent. They also said state government has to take steps to earn the trust of voters. In the meantime, legislators said the ballot initiative has an excellent chance of passing, considering a similar proposal got 45 percent of the vote in 2002. Poirier said voters feel there is nothing they can do to lower gasoline or food costs and may see wiping out the income tax as the only step they can take to save themselves money.
Post Your Comments wnettles wrote on Jun 22, 2008 10:38 PM: " Good article on the end of the state income tax. I did notice, however, that the author failed to mention that quite a few states do not now have an income tax and support their governments on a retail sales tax. I live in one such state and we are looking at getting rid of the property taxes, as well, and replacing the revenue with retail sales tax revenue. " realist wrote on Jun 13, 2008 2:52 PM: " to Spamalot01 - my points were not about slavery or women's rights. It's that the legislature chooses to ignore the people when it suits them and then provides the sop of calling whatever state board is not responding to a constituent or giving out a proclamation. I will concede that you are correct in that we get what we elect. Everybody feels the problem is with the other reps and senators, not my "guy". " Spamalot01 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 1:49 PM: " Realist writes: "The right to petition and the ballot initiative was instituted in the very early days of the Commonwealth to prevent legislatures and governors from conspiring to ignore the will of the people. The result was Article XLVIII (as amended)." The petition process allows just 25% of the population of the commonwealth to petition for a constitutional amendment or passage of a law, subject to the action of two consecutive legislative sessions and, passing that hurdle, popular vote. This allows both the minority seeking the amendment or law their voice in bringing the matter before the people of the state and allows that precious majority population to get involved by letting their reps and senators know where they stand. However, legislators as noted in Realist's statement, are supposed to exercise wisdom and judgement in allowing such petitions to move forward knowing overall what the effect on the population will be should it move on to the voters. Sometimes that means voting for the best interests of the minority over the majority and sometimes not. I'm not going to pretend that every decision made by these people has been on the money or even close. However, preventing tyranny by either an outspoken minority or prejudiced majority is and should be the essence of legislative decision-making. If legislators fail in this challenge, then the people can and should show hem the door. If they don't, then we get what we elect. " Spamalot01 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 1:39 PM: " realist wrote "Spamalot01 seems to have misread his or her state constitution or doesn't care because so far the legislature's ignoring of the people has been to his or her liking." First, I note that realist didn't actually address the examples I gave of whaere we'd be as a nation if the majority ruled unchecked. Do I assume, then, that he/she agrees that there would still be discrimination against women and minorities if ONLY the majority had there say? Second, using the phrase "activist judges" is purely a politically motivated way of obscuring the fact that judges at both the state and federal levels are charged with the responsibility of interpreting the constitution at both the state and federal levels and determining what is and isn't constitutional. Sometimes, the conservative point of view prevails and sometimes the liberal point of view prevails, but that's because judges are doing their jobs. They don't uniformly decide one way or another (look at that supposedly liberal interpretation of eminent domain in CT a few years ago that several conservatives on the court joined as part of the majority expanding the interpretation of eminent domain), much as you might like folks to believe that. " kevin h. wrote on Jun 13, 2008 1:04 PM: " Where we are is the result of generations of self serving, corrupt politicians. Wipe the slate clean and start again. Clean house. Dump the tea!Then create a budget based on todays needs, under the advice and consent of the taxpayer. " clb123 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 12:30 PM: " P.S. This is a breakdown of spending in the State Budget according to the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center (a non-partisan, non-profit organization): 32% goes to Health Care, and the vast majority of that is spent on the federal medicaid program. Two Thirds of those resources are used by people 65 and older. The federal government has been contributing less to its programs, so states make up the difference. 22% goes to public education for local schools and public higher ed. So that's a little over half (54%) of the budget right there. 17% goes to human services (things like DSS) 12% goes to debt service for things like raod and bridge costs and pensions 8% goes to public safety (police, prisons, prosecutors) 4% goes to local aid for cities and towns for local services such as local police and fire 4% goes to other things like housing and transportation and 1% goes to protecting water and air quality and the maintenence of parks Also of note: Full time state employees get a pension, but they do not get social security. Even if they work in the private sector during their lifetime, their SS benefit is reduced by the amount of their pension. " clb123 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 12:11 PM: " Carla Howell from the Committee for Small Government has a website where she advocates to "End all state government funding of education in Massachusetts...This will reduce public school spending per pupil by $3,298 - from $7,553 to $4,255 per pupil per year." How can one think that will not affect schools? And don't be fooled. If the income tax is done away with, other taxes will go up, and other taxes, such as property taxes, hurt the lower and middle classes much more than income taxes. I would much prefer to pay more income taxes and get rid of property taxes. " realist wrote on Jun 13, 2008 11:39 AM: " It's funny, yesterday I was called a socialist, today it could be inferred that I'm a fascist. I guess I can't win. " realist wrote on Jun 13, 2008 11:29 AM: " Spamalot01 seems to have misread his or her state constitution or doesn't care because so far the legislature's ignoring of the people has been to his or her liking. The right to petition and the ballot initiative was instituted in the very early days of the Commonwealth to prevent legislatures and governors from conspiring to ignore the will of the people. The result was Article XLVIII (as amended). Unfortunately, if activist judges appointed by the governor refuse to hear cases of the abuses of power, we are stuck in our one party-state form of tyranny. Please tell me how wanting the peoples' representatives to represent the people is narrow-minded? We elect our reps and senators not to parrot our voices but to combine the will of the people with the elected officials' judgment and wisdom. It seems we have ended up with neither. " Spamalot01 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 11:14 AM: " Realist wrote: "Local reps and senators ignore the will of the people (tax roll backs, anti-gay marriage, etc)." Elected officials aren't supposed to just be sheep and they aren't supposed to solely represent the will of the majority, or so the US Constitution has been written. If all elected reps took that attitude, we'd still have slavery in this country, women would still be prevented from voting and civil rights would be limited to those who can afford lawyers to fight for them. Anyone who doesn't understand that has a poor rasp of the nature of our government and our country. You can be personally selfish if you want, but the government is precluded from such discrimination because it is the government of everyone, not just those who agree with your narrow-minded point of view. " Spamalot01 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 11:07 AM: " dandydon wrote: "THERE SEEMS TO BE NO SENSE OF URGENCY TO CONTROL THE RISING GAS PRICES." As if government per se has anything to do with excessive corporate profit margins and a lack of willingness on the part of the public to get out of their cars, use public transportation systems and demand that gas taxes go to improving and expanding those public transit systems rather than perpetually building and re-building more highways and roads. Income tax has NOTHING to do with gas prices, but the closing of schools and the gutting of every public service that the public expects from the government will be the definite outcome of gutting the tax system. You want to be angry, fine, but don't condemn those who rely on government services to starvation, increased health problems or no education simply because neither you nor the majority of the public wants to be inconvenienced by reducing your reliance on fossil fuels to drive to Wendy's and the local packy! " Realist wrote on Jun 13, 2008 8:56 AM: " This is very similar to the taxpayer anger of the early 80's that led to Prop 2 1/2. In that case it was the municipal taxpayers angry at the unresponsiveness of town officials who would raise property taxes on a whim. Now it's the legislature. They do not vote the way their constituents want. Local reps and senators ignore the will of the people (tax roll backs, anti-gay marriage, etc) and get elected because they come up with a proclamation for every silly event and minor accomplishment or they will call someone in state bureaucracy for someone with a complaint, so everyone keeps voting for their "guy". They then keep the jobs until pensions kick in. The next ballot initiative should be to remove pension benefits from elected officials. Make them contribute to 401(k) and IRAs like the rest of us. That will accomplish one thing that some people want, term limits. Of course, I don't know why I'm excited that this might pass. The legislature will either ignore it or institute a Canadian style GST. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goods_and_Services_Tax_(Canada) " dandydon wrote on Jun 13, 2008 8:32 AM: " WELL I FOR ONE AGREE WITH THIS QUESTION FOR THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER, IT IS TIME TO REMIND OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS WHOSE GOVERNMENT THIS IS. SURE THEY WILL THREATEN TO CLOSE SCHOOLS, PUT THE HANDICAPPED OUT ON THE STREET ANS SO ON.WHAT ARE WE THE TAXPAYERS SUPPOSED TO DO WHEN THERE SEEMS TO BE NO SENSE OF URGENCY TO CONTROL THE RISING GAS PRICES. THE NEXT THING IS TO REMEMBER WHO OF OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS OFFER TO GIVE US THE MUCH NEEDED TAX RELIEF!. THEN WE NEED TO REVIVE THE TERM LIMITATIONS QUESTION , AND CREATE WHAT OUR FOREFATHERS INTENDED A GOVERNMENT OF VOLUNTEERS NOT CAREER MINDED PARTICIPANTS. WE MUST HAVE A TURNOVER OF ELECTED OFFICIALS WITH FRESH IDEAS AND CONCERN FOR US THE SLAVES OF THIS GOVERNMENT. REVOLT BY THE POPULATION AGAINST TAXATION IS NOT ANYTHING NEW.IT IS TIME TO SEND THE MESSAGE. WE NEED TO GO TO THE POLLS IN NOVEMBER AND FINALLY PUT AND END THIS CREATED TAXATION THAT IS OUT OF CONTROL. MARK YOUR CALENDAR TODAY. " socal1 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 6:45 AM: " If all the eligible voters took the few minutes it takes to vote, our elected officials would notice the increase in citizen participation. Hopefully, the increase in voter participation would force the officials to lead in a manner that would reduce waste and "pork" spending. We as voters get the type of leaders and leadership that WE allow. Stop complaining and start participating, at least vote. " or
|
